Talk:A Case of Identity

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.otrcat.com/sherlock-holmes-p-1825.html
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Peter Marrow
A passage attributed to a text called "The sub-text and the subconscious in Late Victorian Literature" by "critic Peter Marrow" was added in this edit and then made into a separate section. The original addition was full of spelling errors which were sometimes corrected by later editors and sometimes preserved with a bracketed "sic", as though they were authentic records of the original source. But what is this original and who is "Peter Marrow"? I can find no reference to this book or article anywhere. Maybe it's authentic, but we need good evidence of that, surely. So I am moving it here. Paul B (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Critic Peter Marrow wrote: "As it stands, the story's ending makes no sense – forcing one to try to look for something left unsaid. Far from Windibank's conduct not having broken any law, he has left himself wide open to Miss Sutherland suing him for breach of promise and certain to win – as the proposal had been made by a man who was already married, and her step-father at that. Yet Holmes does not advise to his client this obvious course. This could, however, make sense on the assumption that Windibank was not only interested in Miss Sutherland's money but also in her person; that the bogus engagement covered an illicit and effectively incestous attaction [sic] which might have been mutual, even if not consumated [sic]; that Miss Sutherland on at least some level knew all along who 'Hosmer Angel' truly was; and that Holmes was acting in her best interest in not bringing all this out in the open and avoiding a traumatic and shattering breakup of her family in the glare of sensational publicity. It can be assumed that Doyle's readership in the 1890s was aware of these undercurrents and tended to agree with Holmes' decision."

A reading of the story shows that Miss Sutherland is foolishly and hopelessly in Love with "Homer Angel" {Hence her refusal to take Holmes advice to forget Angel once and for all} and that she has no idea that "Angel" is actually her stepfather... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.196.212.97 (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Pacific Northwest Literary Society
The cited source: Margaret Brown, as well as the "Proceedings of the Pacific Northwest Literary Society" (ans the Society itself) seem to exist only on Wikipedia (this page, and a text purportedly by George Xavier Baxter in Conan the Barbarian and Conan of Aquilonia pages). I suspect the quote was made up by the editor.94.199.24.28 (talk) 08:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * After extensive searching to confirm the reality of the source, I too have come up empty. Agree that it appears bogus. Deleting the material. BPK (talk) 04:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)